To clarify. In MOM (1) Spell books had distinct spells.. & (2) You could only pick some of the spellbooks (it was almost impossible to get all.. except by reloading over and over again when sacking dungeons) Both together makes the decision making hard. Without the first, it doesn't really matter if the second is met or not.
[quote who="edpfister" reply="24" id="2755474"] The elemental spell books (earth, air, fire, water) will get moved out of character creation and into the tech tree so that players can determine what spell books they want. This sounds not so great... I can already determine which spell books I want. The problem is that there is little to no trade off for picking them and not enough difference between the books. Moving the spell books into the tech tree only makes things worse.
[quote who="Gravedancer" reply="186" id="2754689"] Quoting Simsum, reply 185The primary reason to do it, would be to restore out confidence that there actually is a plan, that the plan isn't just a repeat disaster, and that the team aren't still immune to criticism. Agreed. Brad said he was "blind" to the state of the game. Now he's had an "epiphany" but until we see more details and the scope of the changes, how are we to truly know he gets it? I'd like to t
Actually i saw a very old post by the developer where they talked about magic having spell books.. like MOM.. so you could have between 1-10 life spellbooks.. at the start and you can research ,buy or find new life spellbooks that could give you more advanced spells in life.. people were praising how good this idea is, and how it's like MOM.. but now instead we have a lame yes/no choice.. :(
You have my sword...
[quote] I think when all is said and done Elemental will surpass MoM in every way. In some ways it already does, and in other ways it doesn't.[/quote] Really strange particularly since you go on to list all the ways it's NOT MOM [quote] The Magic system needs a Lot of work, as does balance and hooking up proper skills and abilities. Elemental also NEEDS to have a lot more variation on the amounts and kinds of Units in game. There needs to be a Lot M
[quote who="OliverFA" reply="80" id="2737653"] Quoting Netriak, reply 5Do you really think they are going to change such things now? I myself had made a big thread about point 1 during beta 1, when still could have easily changed it, with a lot of examples and arguments on why it was important to have a more sensible random roll distributions, called "on attack/defense probability distributions." Others have made similar threads I think. If Stardock was ever willing to experim
No definitely not. MOM has tons of interesting spells.. Ability to create magic items. Interesting magic system (Power channelled into mana/Skill/research) + interesting Tactical combat due to the ability to cast overland spells + tons of special abilities, interesting heroes EWOM : Has spells that duplicate each other. No ability to create magic items. Magic system is boring .. No "global enchantments", no concept of mana upkeep instead you have "enchantment" slots.. You can
[quote who="AlixeniusTheGreat" reply="18" id="2741065"]Seriously though, in the future, consider my suggestion of having separate physical and magical resistance stats! It would make the game a whole lot more balanced![/quote] Like in MOM?
[quote who="Lavitage" reply="11" id="2732358"] Quoting LikeTheWhirlwind, reply 10Thank you for the feedback Shryke. We definitely understand where you're coming from, and normalizing magic damage across the board is high on our list of things to do. In the coming weeks we're going to be looking at separating the hit roll (enemy has a chance to resist) and the damage roll for spells and giving spells a damage range instead of simply a 0 - max damage roll.
[quote who="vieuxchat" reply="15" id="2740917"] Quoting LikeTheWhirlwind, reply 10Thank you for the feedback Shryke. We definitely understand where you're coming from, and normalizing magic damage across the board is high on our list of things to do. In the coming weeks we're going to be looking at separating the hit roll (enemy has a chance to resist) and the damage roll for spells and giving spells a damage range instead of simply a 0 - max
[quote who="LikeTheWhirlwind" reply="10" id="2732312"]Thank you for the feedback Shryke. We definitely understand where you're coming from, and normalizing magic damage across the board is high on our list of things to do. In the coming weeks we're going to be looking at separating the hit roll (enemy has a chance to resist) and the damage roll for spells and giving spells a damage range instead of simply a 0 - max damage roll. We realize it
I'm inspired by the discussion above , just thinking aloud Leaving aside "hit rolls" , spell armour and defenses You can have spell damage range based on 1. A base value that is fixed regardless of who casted it and depends only on the spell (i.e 10 points of damage) 2. Some characteristic of the caster only e.g. intellect or level of caster (i.e Half your intellect score or half the level of your caster) 3. A combination of caster c
[quote] I found GC2 to be extremely lackluster and boring on release, and the first expansion didn't do much for me. The second expansion however, was a major revamp of the game, and while I still find GC2 to be a very flavorless, almost empty experience, mechanically it was quite sound, and the AI was decently challenging (and had pretty cool behaviorlets that made it feel somewhat organic, a high compliment for AI in any game). [/quote] I find SD games to be a bit blend as well
[quote who="Dr Franknfurter" reply="20" id="2739550"]I think post like this help everyone feel more confident... how about next week different devs post on different days a quick done list/to-do list just so we can see how different areas are going? maybe have jessie explain the fps trick? also hope that "Magic System Numbers" is followed closely by other combat numbers... general to-hit rolls, defence rolls, action points, individuals vs groups, low health and such... I like the M
[quote] -First they could become actual "guardians," i.e. much more powerful but immobile units that can only defend the city. Even better if they become more powerful as the city grows or if more powerful ones are available at higher city levels. [/quote] Agreed. I wish there was some setting for strength of Magic.. where you could set how strong magic is.. Kind of like MOM.. except in MOM it affected only nodes.. But strength o
[quote who="gorsa" reply="77" id="2734142"]First fix the crashing and memory leaks Then fix champions/heros make them more able to deal with squads, perhaps once you get to squads the champion can attatch to a squad to boost the squads ability/moral Do not go down the path of enabling a single champion to defeat several squads. A Squad can kill any single character just by swarming it. but if the champion can attach to a squad they should give the whole unit a
[quote who="gorsa" reply="79" id="2734179"]So should a single hero be able to defeat multiple squads? [/quote] A immediate level hero should be able to beat weak squads.. A god-like hero should beat almost everything..
PREDICTION Even after 1 year of patching SD will not even include 1/10 of the ideas here. SD gaming style tends towards simple linear models.. Nothing wrong with that, most games are like that. MOM probably has the most complicated system for a TBS game. AOW was simpler.
[quote who="KlausBreuer" reply="7" id="2733832"]luketan, I don't think they would bring out a game which they know to be seriously imbalanced. [/quote] Okay maybe i overstated it. But if you read the dev journals, they definitely give a vibe that they think fixing game balance issues is easy to do and that gamers over-estimate it. I think technically speaking they are right (assuming the framework is flexible enough to easily accommodate changes), but it does take qu
To be fair, even MOM, initally most of the heroes/champions were quite weak at the start.. But they grew more and more powerful once they got a few levels up. Also in MOM, IIRC, the heroes automatically gained exp every turn right? I know some people feel MOM's heroes are way too powerful at the end, but EWOM seems to take the other approach.
[quote who="CHiZZoPs" reply="72" id="2732914"] Quoting Commkeen, reply 62I think this review is spot-on, and much of it applies even to 1.05. Overall, I think the game does need a lot of work, and I hope that future updates will address some of these issues. I know that Elemental is not supposed to be a Master of Magic clone, and I'm not suggesting that it take that path, but MoM made magic important and awe-inspiring in a way that Elemental has yet to accomplish.&
[quote who="Nenjin" reply="61" id="2731034"]No, I think he's firmly in that special place fans get when they're experiencing cognitive dissonance.[/quote] True. But not many in this thread. I think most come under the "It isn't good.. but SD will eventually fix it" school. Not sure if that's a mark of the fanboy by having faith.. but that's the school i'm in :D
[quote who="grimzag1" reply="10" id="2732575"]For one thing, there really should be a bigger difference in terms of damage between spell levels. At the moment, advancing a spell level gives access to more spells, but doesn't necessarily give better ones outside of the realm of summoning. In addition, as many have noted, the different spell books need to be more specialized. At the moment, there isn't much reason for a custom sovereign to have more than tw
I would like to encourage people to buy it, but that's only because I preordered :D Despite StarDock saying they are privately owned and all that, I still think if the initial sales tank , it is likely less resources will be poured into it. So to a certain extent, I think it's going to be a self-fulfilling prophecy, if everyone who bought the game advises "don't buy or at least wait", there's going to be a problem. Personally i think EWOM will be good (not M